Jump to content

Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 76.14.45.22 (talk) at 14:03, 15 October 2015 (→‎Coretta Scott King: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

    ↑ To top of page
    Shortcuts
    Welcome—ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia! (Am I in the right place?)
    Ask a question

    October 12

    Information Incorrect

    I was the co-host of the Charles J. Givens Radio show, but was not the individual that sold the investments that are referenced. The investments affecting Givens and that whole matter is widely reported in the Orlando Sentinel. You will find my name not mentioned in any of these reports. I think they meant to reference someone else.

    Charles J. Givens — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.104.27.6 (talk) 03:49, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I assume that you are James L Paris. I've put a "citation needed" tag on the mention of your name in the article. If no-one finds a reference to verify the inclusion of your name, then we will just delete it. Dbfirs 07:49, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    disappointed from your Wikipedia site

    Dear Sirs, I have prepared an article to be published on your Site about the MedDiet Certification but unfortunately I was disappointed from Yann who declined it and I didn't understand the reason. I didn't know that you usually refuse to publish cultural information, Anyway, thank you, Regards, MedDiet (talk) 06:47, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • Link: Draft:MedDiet Certification
    • Your submission was rejected because it did not provide reliable sources to determine if the company is notable. We are not here to promote your company. Wikipedia articles must have reliable independent sources that have nothing to do with the company itself. The sources in your article were the company website and Facebook. Those are not considered reliable nor independent. Frankly, we really do not care what the company website says about a product since they are rarely neutral. Please see the general guidelines for all articles. We do publish cultural information, as long as it proves why it deserves to be included and as long as it follows all of our policies and guidelines. In addition, normal protocol says you should talk this over with Yann since they are the one that declined your request. --Stabila711 (talk) 06:55, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict) We don't "publish" anything -- We only summarize professionally published, mainstream academic or journalistic sources. If something really is culturally relevant information, those sources will exist. New articles must be verified by professionally published, mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are specifically about the subject but not affiliated with it. The MedDiet's website and facebook page do not meet those requirements, as they are not independent. However, your username implies a conflict of interest, which means that you should avoid editing any page concerning the MedDiet at all. Ian.thomson (talk) 06:57, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Think this comes not under 'for profit companies' but from of one of the European NGO organanisations. See: Assured Food Standards. So, you're draft simply needs you (or someone else) to supply reliable sources. However please note: If someone else can provide those reference and they work for the same organization - DON'T let them 'ever' use your account to add them. Get them to create their own account. Otherwise you will will be blocked from further editing and blacklisted. See:Wikipedia:Username_policy#Shared_accounts. Reason: Wikipedia is not a free hosting system for all-and-sundry. If your organanisation is notable enough for inclusion on this encyclopedia there should not be any problem with providing reliable references. The ball still remains firmly in your court upon this issue. Any disaponment you may feel is down to you're missunderstandings of what Wikiedia is. Other than that: Happy editing. P.S. Do you get paid to do any of this? – if so explain and we might be able to provide more feed-back suitable to a professional copywriter/copyeditor. Who exactly requested the article be written (name, title or position, etc)may help us also in this respect.--Aspro (talk) 10:41, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Why am I not seeing an "edit" link on the section header for October 12 above this section? I'm seeing it for every other day listed here. JIP | Talk 07:20, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    It's weird. I have tried to fix it, and failed. I thought it might be caused by some unpaired bracket or tab in the preceding subsection; but I have inserted a dummy subsection above it, which gets its own "Edit" link without solving the problem. Maproom (talk) 08:26, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I tried as well and failed. The section is not being assigned a section number for some reason. The Visited pages section is number 37 and number 38 is assigned to Information Incorrect. Strange... --Stabila711 (talk) 08:30, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    That was tricky. It was caused by a combination of different open tags in two different sections. Fixing either of them didn't help by itself but fixing both did it.[1][2] PrimeHunter (talk) 10:16, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Moving a WikiProject leaflet - used during Wikimania 2014 - to Commons or here so that the project can re-use it.

    Is it possible/permissible to have the WikiProject Disability leaflet (created for and used during Wikimania 2014) moved to either Commons or en.WP so that the WikiProject can re-use it? It seems to be a waste of effort and resources to let such a document disappear into obscurity after only a single use. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:15, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Contact EdSaperia to wrap up the dangling lidensing issue and then they can all be uploaded to Commons. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 11:06, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Can blocked editors get thanks?

    I use wp:notifications to thank editors whose work I appreciate. Sometimes, not often, I find those editors have been wp:blocked. I am just wondering if blocked users still get the notifications (can they even log into Wikipedia)?

    Thanks in avance, Ottawahitech (talk) 12:05, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Ottawahitech Blocked editors can log in, they just can't edit (except for their own user talk page, unless they have also been blocked from that). I think that they can also receive thanks. DES (talk) 13:22, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    The Sage - Newcastle England

    I would like to inform you that the facts that are recorded on your site on the structural engineers for the construction of the Sage Newcastle is incorrect. Your article shows Buro Happold as the structural engineers however this is incorrect as it was Mott MacDonald who carried out the Structural and Mechanical & Electrical. Fosters were the architects and they correctly state on their web site Mott MacDonald were the Structural and Mechanical & Electrical Engineers.

    Could you please update your site so that it correctly informs the public.

    Thank you

    Regards

    Anton Sawicki — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.225.80.114 (talk) 16:09, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    This should be requested at Talk:The Sage Gateshead, however, to quote Foster and partners here:-
    Structure
    The roof, engineered by Buro Happold, is an entirely independent structure supported by four structural steel arches spanning 80 metres from north to south with a secondary structure of single radii steel members
    So it appears Buro Happold were the Structural Engineers - at least for the roof - which is structurally the most important element of the Sage - Arjayay (talk) 16:26, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I cannot remove this article.

    I would like this article removed as I cannot seem to do it. http://wpedia.goo.ne.jp/enwiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Lisa_Kessous

    Can someone just go in and take it off, Please. Thankyou. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magoohoo (talk • contribs) 17:31, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    The link you have given is not to Wikipedia, but to a non-related website that echoes or re-uses past or present content of Wikipedia. We have no control over what a parasitic site like this does or doesn't contain. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:49, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, Magoohoo. You have linked to a mirror of Wikipedia. We can't delete anything on sites that mirror Wikipedia's content. Any site may duplicate the contents of Wikipedia (including unfinished drafts) because they are originally published here under a free licesnse (CC-BY-SA) that allows redistribution. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 17:52, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    However, that site uses the GFDL licence, not CC by SA, so is it actually a legitimate copy? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:59, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia is dual-licensed, using the GFDL is perfectly acceptable for a reuser. Moreover, Wikipedia used to be solely under the GFDL, and a mirror set up several years ago would have to sue use that to be compliant. DES (talk) 18:18, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    html code

    i need to copy html code of a table of specifications of some cars can you tell how to do it i needed for small webpage for mini college project plz help me — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.212.195.230 (talk) 18:13, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    This page is for questions about how to edit Wikipedia. You might want to try http://www.w3schools.com/html/default.asp which has much general info about html with examples. DES (talk) 18:19, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    If you're planning on hosting a webpage for a college project here on Wikipedia, note that Wikipedia isn't a webhost. I suggest looking at alternatives, like Google Sites or GitHub. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 18:21, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that the OP was looking for instructions on how to copy HTML source code from one place to another, possibly to copy it out of Wikipedia, but this was not very clear. DES (talk) 22:49, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Sadism

    I think a separate article called sadism should be created, at the moment the only viable article is BDSM which covers sado masochistic sexual behaviour, there is a link to sadism as a dicdef but that isn't sufficient. I'm a regular editor so I'm fairly sure if i create this article it will have some kind of problem, what I'm not sure. I come here from the angle that I was just editing the malignant narcissism article - these characters are not sexual sadists, nor masochists, they are simply sadists and want to hurt others. Would there be any kind of consensus to create the article? Szzuk (talk) 19:12, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • @Szzuk: You don't need consensus to create an article. As long as the topic is diverse enough and can stand on its own you should be fine. The only problem I can see is the not dictionary issue. Is the topic strong enough to stand on its own, or will it be the target of a merge attempt? Are there enough sources that only deal with sadism, or do most sources already lump it in with narcissism and other behaviors? To me, I don't really know the difference so that would have to be made clear. Is sadistic personality disorder the same thing? --Stabila711 (talk) 19:23, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      I'd say the term sadism is as global as anyone would think with a first guess, so it should stand on its own apart from sadistic personality disorder. I'm also thinking why isn't this a disambiguation page now, surely there are plenty of valid search terms. I will have a think. Thank you for the reply. Szzuk (talk) 19:35, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      Go for it. Create an article on the subject. It is clearly different enough from BDSM to justify a stand-alone article. --Guy Macon (talk) 23:48, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Search for reference name

    I'm missing something that I hope is simple. I need to make some changes to some references. I've name the references and some of them have a name such as "1993 WUG". I thought I would do a simple search for that string to see whether the access dates were identical or varied, but a search for that string doesn't pull up any of the references. I read the Help:Searching, which suggests I should not expect to find them, but there must be a way. I've tested that searching for the string in AWB works.

    I soon the problem is that the string is in the reference. Here is an example of an article which contains the string:

    Is there an easy way to search for these?--S Philbrick(Talk) 21:55, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I assume you mean search all of Wikipedia mainspace for the string? If so, I doubt that's possible, as it would require reading and searching the wikitext of every one of millions of articles. Your search would run for days if not weeks, and consume an inordinate amount of server resources. The searches we can do are possible only because the text has been previously indexed, and that's done only for the text that readers see (and I'm not sure it includes all of that, such as the content of infoboxes). I think the only way you can do what you want is to edit each of the articles involved and use your browser's Find function to locate occurrences of that string. "But I could be wrong!" ―Mandruss ☎ 22:05, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Use insource: like insource:"1993 WUG". See more at Help:Searching. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:31, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    See, I was right when I said I could be wrong! ―Mandruss ☎ 22:32, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Such a search would be futile as well since there is no standardized way to name references. As WP:CITE#Repeated citations notes, from the technical point of view it can be almost anything and my experience is that practice is very varied. What someone calls <ref name="1993 WUG"> could be called simply <ref name="wug"> by another person, <ref name="source1"> by someone else, or without any ref name. Searching for the title of some ref, like "SIXTEENTH WORLD UNIVERSITY GAMES -- 1993", however comes up with results. There's also a tool that searches for references by ISBN here. By the way, I'm curious as to why would you want to compare access dates? Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 22:36, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    From their comment, " I've name[d] the references," I gathered they know what names they are looking for as they created them. ―Mandruss ☎ 22:40, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    One can search for a ref name within an article by simply editing the article and searching the wiki-text. Or it may be easier to search for "<ref" and compare to see if there are duplicate citations. I have done this often. One cannot usefully search for a reference name across articles, because, as is said above, there is no standard for how to name citations, and an identical cite might have different names in different articles, and two quite different cites have the same name. Besides, the reference name is in the wiki-text but is not rendered, so one cannot search for it at all without a tool, such as AWB, that exposes the wiki-text. DES (talk) 22:47, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    As I said above, insource: can do it. insource:"1993 WUG" currently finds four articles. They have all been edited by Sphilbrick who I guess added that name to all four and found exactly what was wanted. Other editors may of course have chosen other ref names for the same reference. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:43, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Finnusertop, even if we assume that the wikitext is two or three times larger than the displayed pages, we can already search the content of all 61,164,996 pages of all kinds on Wikipedia in a fraction of a second. Searching the Wikitext of all 6,862,572 articles would be even quicker. See Boyer–Moore string search algorithm for a way to perform searches very quickly. --Guy Macon (talk) 23:01, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    No, the actual text is not searched when you use the search box. That would be too slow for data of our size. As Mandruss said, "The searches we can do are possible only because the text has been previously indexed". This could for example include a list of all pages containing "1993" and another of all pages containing "WUG". A search of "1993 WUG" can then look up pages which are on both lists and see whether "1993" and "WUG" are consecutive. It may be more complicated in practice for efficiency reasons. See more at Search engine indexing. There are also users who have downloaded the full article text or have access to the full database and may perform selected searches on request, but it's slow. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:29, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    And you (Finnusertop) think that the search method (which, BTW, I linked to in my previous comment) that doesn't search the actual text works fine when searching article content but won't work when searching Wikitext... why? --Guy Macon (talk) 23:55, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks Primehunter, that's exactly what I was looking for. I had looked at Help:Searching, which I see mentions the insource option, but it doesn't explain what it is. I see that Help:Searching/Draft does explain it - that page is linked from Help:Searching, so I should have checked there.--S Philbrick(Talk) 23:19, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Finnusertop: I do understand that the reference name could be anything. However, every one of the references I'm looking for is one of several hundred references I created and I used a standardized format "YYYY ZZZ" where YYYY is the year, and ZZZ is one of "WUG", "Pan Am", "U18" etc,. all known to me. I care about the access dates for the following reason — given, for example that I'm looking for 1993 WUG, I know exactly what the title will state and exactly what the URL will state but the access date will depend on which day I worked on it. I'm searching for the reference name rather than the title because I created all the title so I know exactly what schema I used; the titles are generally standardized but there are some exceptions.--S Philbrick(Talk) 00:01, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]


    October 13

    Erasing Message for Deletion

    I got a message that my post might be deleted because of a lack of references. I have created the reference list, and now wish to delete the message for deletion, but don't know how. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carolineeliaz (talk • contribs) 02:13, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Carolineeliaz, sources have been cited so I have removed the WP:BLPROD tag. However almost all the currently cited sources are WP:PRIMARY, that is they are to the subject's own work or to publications by organizations that the subject worked for or with. As such they do little or nothing to establish the notability of the subject. Note that Wikipedia uses the term notability in a specialized way. Here it does not mean "importance" but rather "degree to which independent published reliable sources have discussed the subject". To show it, the main method is to cite such independent sources. An articel where this is not done is all to likely to be deleted for lack of notability. Please read Wikipedia's Golden Rule and Your First Article for some background on this. DES (talk) 02:25, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Email notifications for article talk pages?

    Hello, I'm not receiving email notifications for changes to an article Talk page on an article on my Watchlist I have edited. Sometimes I get an email notification and sometimes I don't. I've ticked the box in my User profile to receive email notifications when a page on my Watchlist is changed. In email options I've opted to receive individual notifications as they come in...Any ideas what is going wrong here? XRii (talk) 06:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @XRii: Help:Email notification says: "Note that once an email notification has been sent, additional talk page changes will not result in any further notifications, until the user has logged in and visited their talk page. In addition, the user's own page changes never trigger a notification mail to themselves." The same applies to other watched pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:41, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you PrimeHunter, but they're apart from my own changes, and also I'm talking about article Talk pages on my Watchlist. I log in and check them from time to time, but have been busy several times and logged in again to find there were heaps of changes I was not notified of, over days or weeks. Eg. I logged in yesterday - no changes, and then logged in today, and there were two additions to a watched Talk page, but I had no notifications...XRii (talk) 09:53, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, I think I've figured it out. Sorry to put you to the trouble PrimeHunter. I've been lazy when I get notifications and just looking at the diffs rather than viewing the Talk page. From MediaWiki 1.5, you can get an e-mail after a watched page has been edited by somebody else. This will not be repeated until you view the page. Viewing a diff or the page history is not enough. Note that you have to be logged in when viewing the page, otherwise you will not be notified of further changes. Optionally this notification system can ignore minor changes (this is the default). from Help:Watching pages. Thanks again for your help. XRii (talk) 10:10, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Speedy deletion of Iqbalur Rahim page!

    Dear sir,

    I am an editor on your free wikipedia group. I had a page in wikipedia but my page is deleted now for the reason A tag has been placed on Iqbalur Rahim requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement dated Oct 05, 2015.

    I am requesting you to resolve the problem and i am one of the member of this team who they are working for https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.rafusoft.iqbalurrahimmp and http://www.iqbalurrahim.com/ website

    Warm regards, Poresh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poresh (talk • contribs) 07:52, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello, Poresh. I'm afraid it doesn't make any difference what team you are a member of. Those two sites say "©2015 Google" and "© 2014 Iqbalur Rahim MP. All Rights Reserved". Therefore material from those sites may not be copied into Wikipedia unless the copyright holder explicitly releases the material under a suitable licence such as CC-BY-SA (which will allow anybody to reuse it for any purpose, including commercially, as long as they give proper attribution). If the copyright holder wishes to do so, they should follow the process in donating copyright materials; but it is probably not worth their doing so for text, because text from their own website is usually far too promotional for Wikipedia. Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view, based almost entirely on what people unconnected with the subject have published about them: Wikipedia has almost no interest in what a person or organisation (or their employees, relatives, or associates) say about themselves. --ColinFine (talk) 09:28, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    To stop people from editing Wikipedia

    I am from India and I am 18 years old. All the information provided in the Wikipedia are correct but allowing others to edit it may result in losing important data. I have seen many people who edit Wikipedia and provide wrong information. So please don't allow others to edit it so that Wikipedia continues its legacy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.29.202.73 (talk) 09:21, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    (edit conflict) Hello, person from India. Information is hardly ever lost from Wikipedia: except in certain cases involving sensitive personal information, all previous versions of an article are there in its history, so any information that has been removed can be restored if it is appropriate.
    Wikipedia is designed to be The Encyclopaedia that Anyone May Edit, so your suggestion would change its character fundamentally. If you think that somebody has removed information from an article that should be kept, you can restore it (but if somebody removes it again, you should not restore it again - that is called "edit war": rather, you should discuss it with them on the article's talk page. See WP:BRD for how this works.) Do bear in mind that every single piece of information in Wikipedia should be cited to a reliable published source: people often remove information because there is no source given for it, and you should not restore the information unless you give a published source. Please see WP:42. --ColinFine (talk) 09:37, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you seriously suggesting you should be the only person allowed to edit Wikipedia? JIP | Talk 11:26, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also, it should be noted that "All the information provided in <anything> are correct" is an impossible statement, since no source is perfect. Even your own memory and senses are not a perfect reflection of reality. No source can be perfect; however the ability of Wikipedia to be constantly corrected and fixed is what we believe allows us to be closer to perfection than sources that enshrine errors and mistakes permanently and don't let them be fixed. --Jayron32 14:40, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Since this edit to this Help Desk is the only edit from the IP address, it is not even possible to determine whether there is any particular page that he or she is concerned about. However, as the other editors have pointed out, if correct information is replaced by incorrect information, we have a dispute resolution policy for addressing it. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:45, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Unless this person has the same IP address.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:11, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Limit displayed languages on the left

    Hi,

    Is there anyway to create a specific list of what languages to linked articles appear on the left of the page after a search has been performed? I switch often between languages but have to sift through many languages that will never be selected.

    I would like to be able to choose the displayed languages from a list.

    Thanks for your help!

    Bri — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsbaixo (talk • contribs) 13:08, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Bsbaixo: See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 136#How to adapt the languages list? PrimeHunter (talk) 13:50, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi,

    That totally almost worked. I added the code to my global css file. Now when I go to a page it shows my list for about 1 second then gets over written by the entire list.

    I am getting a triangle warning sign while I am editing the css file stating something about the li reference. Could it be that? Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsbaixo (talk • contribs) 14:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I tried the warning suggestion but the behavior remains unchanged.

    Bri — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsbaixo (talk • contribs) 14:43, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Bsbaixo: It works for me. I also get the triangle warning and ignore it. What is your browser and skin? You could try adding the code locally in your CSS instead. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:15, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bsbaixo: Over at de.wp, User:TMg has suggested the following code:
    #p-lang li {
	display: none;
}
#p-lang .interwiki-de, #p-lang .interwiki-en {
	display: list-item;
}
    I have no idea if that’ll work for you, but it might be worth a try. Rgds ✦ hugarheimur 21:28, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information

    At [ https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Confidentiality_agreement_for_nonpublic_information ] the page says "By typing your name below, clicking the check box, and clicking the “Sign Document” ("Sign Document") button below, you acknowledge that..." but i see no place to type a name, no checkbox, and no sign document button. All I see is a non-clickable "submit" button. (Tried it on firefox, opera, and google chrome) do other people see the same thing, or is it just me? --Guy Macon (talk) 14:32, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I haven't tried it, but did you see this: meta: Confidentiality_agreement_for_nonpublic_information/How_to_sign Rwessel (talk) 14:46, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    (e/c) @Guy Macon: The mbox above it, links to How to sign and as you can see, these agreements are signed through phabricator which is where this fragment of text is displayed. See also here and here. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 14:47, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I just tried to establish a link to amazon.com on a wikipedia page that I created and but the link did not "take."

    It is under "collaborations" on the page for David V. Chartrand, journalist-author. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfitzpatr (talk • contribs) 14:56, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    In your most recent edit you surrounded the text with nowiki tags, so that prevents anything between the tags from being regarded as a link. In any case there are at least 2 reasons why such a link there would be inappropriate. Firstly we don't put external links in the body of an article, see WP:external links. Secondly there is no reason to provide an advertising link to one specific supplier such as Amazon; if you use an ISBN link, it will provide means for searching a number of sources. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:08, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    How do I correct errors in sources/footnotes?

    A page I've been editing - and which I recently visited (Hawks, band) - shows some errors in the footnotes/citation sources. I have identified some of the errors and would like to correct those errors. I have not been able to find out how to accomplish this task either through a brief look at the Help Desk or here. Can someone point me to an answer or help directly? Thanks!THX1136 (talk) 16:26, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    It looks like you're referring to Hawks (band). The best place to start is checking out WP:REFB. Tiggerjay (talk) 16:32, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    You haven't given any indication of your problem. If you don't know where to edit the reference then edit where the reference is used in the article text and not where it's displayed in the references section. If you don't know how to edit the whole page at once then click the "Edit" tab at top. If you don't know which change to make to the reference then click the "help" link at the error message, and if you still have problems then say which reference you need help with. Please be specific when you ask for help. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:48, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    For example ref 5. says it has first1 but lacks last1. If you click the up arrow you will find a place where the reference is placed. That is in a History section. When you open it for edit you'll find a pair of <ref>...</ref> tags with a citation template between them: {{cite web|first=Joe|...}}. The {{cite web}} template expects the author's last name if the first name is given. However the source is a blog entry and its author remains semi-anonymous, signing just by name. You may for example replace the parameter name first with author – it's assumed that author parameter contains a complete indication of the person.
    Another example: ref. no 6 says access-date seems invalid. And it actually is: the year is 32013, while it probably should be 2013 (the reference has been added on August 5: [3]).
    CiaPan (talk) 17:27, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
     Fixed --CiaPan (talk) 09:34, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    where ask help from other wikieditor?

    OP not good use mediawiki syntax, not patience try learn so seek other editor help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahfuzur rahman shourov (talk • contribs) 17:08, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    You're in the correct place. Just go ahead and ask your question, or let us know what specific problem you're having, and someone should be along shortly to help you out. We have another help location at The Teahouse, which is more designed for new users, but you may also find help there. --Jayron32 17:13, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    OP want editor who will make list table for a episode pageMahfuzur rahman shourov (talk) 17:24, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Mahfuzur rahman shourov: Possibly you could browse through some pages listed at Special:AllPages/list of episodes and use one of them as a pattern. --CiaPan (talk) 11:14, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Resolved

    I'm sorry, after I asked my question Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2015_September_28#Internal_link_without_underline two weeks ago, it fell off my watchlist.

    In many cases, such as in Chinese numerals, the underscore under links is misleading. Is there a way to link without the underlines? — Sebastian 18:01, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    The problem is that a link such as [[wikt:十|十]] renders as 十, which looks like a different character altogether. Some replied that those are interwiki links, but the problem also exists for Wikipedia internal links, and can be reproduced even with our own familiar alphabet, e.g. [[F]] - F appears like an "E". (Your font may vary.)

    The solutions offered focused on how I can change my own display, but that's not why I was asking. I want to make our articles clear and unmistakable for all our readers. One template that seems to do that is {{IPA_link/core}}: "{{IPA_link/core|IPAsym name=Eff|ipa symbol=F}}" renders nicely as "Template:IPA link/core". But what is it in that template that does this? The relevant part seems to me "{{square bracket open|2}}Eff{{!}}F]]", but that still renders with the underscore as F. — Sebastian 19:39, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    <span class="nounderlines">[[Main Page]]</span> produces Main Page, but if you want this to be Wikipedia-wide without adding this coding everywhere, you'd have to request a change to the site's CSS. --Alden Bates (talk) 20:18, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, Alden Bates, that answers my question. Matter closed. — Sebastian 21:02, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see underlined links anywhere at Wikipedia unless I hover the mouse over them or choose Cologne Blue as skin at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. What is your browser, and what is your skin and "Underline links" setting at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering? Do you also see underlined links when you log out? PrimeHunter (talk) 20:24, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Isn't link formatting a browser-specific (rather than a Wikipedia skin-specific) option. I have my browser set up not to display underlining for any hypertext link on any internet site.--ukexpat (talk) 12:56, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Wrong forum. — Sebastian 21:04, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    Dear Sir

    I’m hoping this e-mail reaches the right person/department for it attempts to forewarn you of a serious discrepancy of publishing law. You can also appreciate the enormous task in hand for me to locate the intended publisher in question of which there are many in the west coast of the USA.

    I am a professional illustrator based in the UK and I was invited by the author to illustrate his book entitled [personal details redacted].

    He is under the impression he has already paid me for my work involved and which I can assure you I have received no payment or issued any receipts. He has now taken this work out of the UK , approaching publishers on the west coast claiming ownership. He has flatly refused to co-operate in this matter and has resulted in him assaulting me attacking me and putting me in hospital. This matter is also the subject of an on going copyright infringement lawsuit here in the UK and not due for completion for another 9 months.

    In other words he has stolen my creative genius to pursue his own selfish greed which I’m sure you agree if you want to preserve the very nature of honest business and publishing in the US does not meet with your criteria. I have constantly instructed him he has no right to approach any publisher until full payment is received. You will find a copy of the invoice as an attachment. Until this is satisfactorily resolved I will ask you NOT to get involved with the book or the author for he is nothing but a low life thief and fraudster and you obviously will not want to be cited in this matter in the UK. I am also very well aware, as in the UK great efforts are taken to keep our business at the highest professional standards, free from scandal, malice, fraud and dealing with such people so, if by chance this e-mail has reached the wrong persons I would appreciate it if you would forward it on to the right people.

    I am also able to send you sufficient proof the artwork is my creation at a later date. If I can be of further assistance please don’t hesitate to contact me.

    Yours Sincerely

    [redacted] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidbrown0107 (talk • contribs) 20:07, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    Merge error

    I've just performed a merge per WP:FMERGE (diff), but, unfortunately, I misspelt the source page title in the edit summary. Is there anything that needs to be done to correct the error? Tevildo (talk) 23:42, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Tevildo: Edit summaries cannot be changed but attribution to the source is required by our license when content is copied between pages. You can make a dummy edit with the right link in the edit summary. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:30, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Done, thanks. Tevildo (talk) 08:11, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    editing

    why is it when ever I edit the Dance Theatre of Harlem page, it deletes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Francisjohnlawrence (talk • contribs) 23:46, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Francisjohnlawrence: if you look at the article's history , you will see that "it doesnt delete", but that other editors have reverted your additions and frequently given explanations "remove lists of non-notable people" and "RV addition of non-notables, per WP:WTAF, WP:NOTADIRECTORY, WP:V, and WP:COI". -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:26, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Login mistake

    I made two edits I made two edits here before I realized I was not login. Naturally my IP address shows. Is there a way to correct this on history? Cheers. Grahamboat (talk) 23:54, 13 October 2015 (UTC) before I realized I was not login. Naturally my IP address shows. Is there a way to correct this on history? Cheers. Grahamboat (talk) 23:54, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Grahamboat: Yes, please contact the WP:OVERSIGHT team and you may want to mention the edit here as well. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:20, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Note that oversight can hide the IP address for privacy reasons but not reassign the edit to your account. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:24, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    October 14

    How long should it take for an edit to a page to be saved?

    I have edited a page and the screen states "Saving Edit, please wait". I have tried this three times today and have left the screen sit for over 20 minutes with no page acceptance. I am receiving no feed back so have no idea if I have done something wrong in my edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JHFriedman (talk • contribs) 00:09, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @JHFriedman: i use a lot of terrible connections and have never gotten "Saving Edit, please wait" - it will either save my edit within 5-10 seconds or dump me from the page . How long did it take to save the message you posted here? Are you using the new default "What you see is what you get " editing interface or have you changed to one of the older interfaces? Are you editing from a mobile device? What article were you attempting to edit? Were you including an e-mail or web address/URL?-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:19, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I used the default web page editor (perhaps that is the WYSIWYG editor) from my desktop computer on a high speed cable internet connection. I waited well over 10 minutes with the message "Saving Edit, please wait" on screen - I never got dumped nor received any error message. I will try it again now to see it today makes a difference and reply here if it succeeds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JHFriedman (talk • contribs) 18:36, 14 October 2015‎ (UTC)JHFriedman (talk) 18:55, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    An edit via Firefox today failed, however editing the entry via Chrome browser worked immediately. Chrome is the way to go in future it seems. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JHFriedman (talk • contribs) 18:53, 14 October 2015 (UTC) JHFriedman (talk) 18:55, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    request edit

    Re: Barry McGuire He also starred for a year in the Broadway musical Hair in 1968. Barry also appeared in an episode of "Matt Dillon". *I cannot find that there was ever a tv show named "Matt Dillon". The actual show name was probably "Gunsmoke". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.23.242.110 (talk) 03:48, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Statistics

    Please advise how to get statistics of an aditor's input. — Сергей Олегович (talk) 09:56, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    A tool at Wikimedia tool lab gives you ample statistics. For instance, yours. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 10:01, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Go to Special:Contributions/Сергей Олегович or Special:Contributions/CiaPan etc., scroll to the bottom of the page and explore the links 'User rights', 'Edit counts', 'Global contributions'.... --CiaPan (talk) 10:21, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. Will try it. — Сергей Олегович (talk) 17:37, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks again, it has worked fine. If possible will ask a further question:

    Q: Is there any tool for analysing all input in the Wikipedia as a whole? My goal is finding the median input by Namespaces per user. Each particular user page in X!'s has break down of input by Namespaces. Again, is it possible to calculate the median %% of input by Namespaces in a lang project of Wiki and/or in total? — Сергей Олегович (talk) 19:44, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Сергей Олегович: There isn't a tool to my knowledge. However, you can perform a database download and work through the data on something like Excel. Please be advised, that depending on the number of days you want to process it could amount to terabytes of data. So while it is probably possible (I have never done a database download myself) it requires an enormous amount of space and processing power to get all that information. --Stabila711 (talk) 19:51, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Paul Bern articlw

    [1] Recently I submitted corrections to your page on Paul Bern and his family. There are suppositions here that are not correct and other errors. I never heard back about the changes which I know to be correct. He is my relative. Please let me know why the changes weren't made and I wasn't contacted. Thanks. Laura — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.67.23.95 (talk) 11:17, 14 October 2015‎ (UTC)[reply]

    If you mean the edits made by Raleighroo, they were reverted as unsourced speculation. You'll see the reason in the article history. What you know to be correct is not relevant for Wikipedia; what matters is what can be verified by references to published reliable sources independent of the subject. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:30, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    References

    1. ^ Henrietta Levy and other info

    Newcastle Cathedral

    I work for St Nicholas Cathedral in Newcastle upon Tyne. There are two Cathedrals in the city, so they are referred to by name rather than one being Newcastle Cathedral. Therefore the name of this article needs to change to St Nicholas Cathedral. It is causing clashes with our facebook page too, meaning there are two listings for the same place on facebook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.27.121.247 (talk) 11:28, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    1) If you would like to see Newcastle Cathedral moved to a different name, the place to discuss it is on the talk page of the article in question, which is located at Talk:Newcastle Cathedral. 2) Wikipedia has no control over what Facebook does with our content. If there's an issue at Facebook, it can only be fixed by Facebook, so you need to contact Facebook and not Wikipedia with your concern. --Jayron32 13:00, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    The editor put a request edit template on the talk page but they mixed up the syntax. I've corrected it. Full disclosure: I don't know anything about Newcastle. Dismas|(talk) 13:46, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    St. Nicholas' Cathedral already exists as a disambiguation page, to all the cathedrals dedicated to St. Nicholas see Talk:Newcastle Cathedral. - Arjayay (talk) 14:19, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Frequent updates

    A user is updating 2015 Men's European Volleyball Championship matches set by set. I think I have read before that this is not ok here on Wikipedia, but I do not remeber the policy. Maybe I am just wrong, am I wrong? It is ok to edit set by set results? Thanks Osplace 16:23, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm afraid it is not clear cut. Template talk:Match in progress states at the top:-
    There is currently no overall general consensus on whether to forbid the practice of updating scores in real time, especially when many of these edits may come from new or unregistered users. Please follow the policies and guidelines of assume good faith, please do not bite the newcomers, and edit warring before reverting such edits. Although some WikiProjects like WikiProject Football and WikiProject Snooker may forbid the practice, a proposal to add the rule to the general "What Wikipedia is not" policy page failed with no consensus.
    So, unless there is a specific policy about Volleyball, all you can do is ask nicely - Arjayay (talk) 17:01, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Having hunted around Wikipedia:WikiProject Volleyball the Wikipedia:WikiProject Volleyball/Guidelines are fairly short and do not cover this, and I can't find any other comments about volleyball scores.
    You could consider adding {{current sport|sport=volleyball|event=volleyball tournament}}, to the article, which produces this template but that may just incite even more frequent updates. - Arjayay (talk) 17:15, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:EPHEMERAL and WP:NOTNEWS and just basic WP:V requiring a reliably published source for content claims, not the primary source of the games themselves. there is WP:NODEADLINE for us to have "the most up to the minute" information. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:29, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I want to create a company Wikipedia page. Please help

    I want to create a company Wikipedia page. Please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benzerpharmacy (talk • contribs) 16:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Please read WP:COI. Basically, you shouldn't. If a company merits a Wikipedia, eventually someone who is not payed by the company will come along and create a Wikipedia article about it. It appears you are trying to create an article about a company you are employed by or payed by or have an interest in in some way. Because you have a conflict of interest, you shouldn't be doing so. --Jayron32 16:30, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Please read the conflict of interest policy and what Wikipedia is not. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a directory or an advertising vehicle. If your company is notable in the sense of having been described by multiple independent reliable sources, a neutral editor is likely to create an article. However, you may create a draft article in draft space via the Articles for Creation process and submit it for review. If, as is likely, it is promotional, or reads like an advertisement, it will be declined, and it is possible that, if the company is notable, neutral editors may be able to create a neutral article. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:32, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    can someone help to add feature comparisons in list of disk editors?

    OP unable to type muchMahfuzur rahman shourov (talk) 17:00, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Leo giamani wilkipedia page

    Good afternoon. My name is Robert Foresta. I have a wilkipedia page under the alias leo giamani that is showing my real name Robert Foresta. This leo giamani was an alias that i did porn under over five years ago. I have not done any films since and have moved on with my life. This page is affecting me both personally and professionally. Please remove robert foresta from this page. Thank you

    sincerely, Robert Foresta — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikewatch (talk • contribs) 17:00, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    From the page history, I cannot see any evidence of the name Robert Foresta having recently been anywhere in the article, so without this Help Desk request, there would be nothing on Wikipedia to link the two names. However, I also notice that the OP has today been reverted twice for altering the spelling of "Leo Giaman[n]i" without a Reliable Source. Not sure what's going on here. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 185.74.232.130 (talk) 17:19, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    A strange business

    NAC: Apparent software problem that appears to have been resolved. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    I've just discovered I cannot view the content of Jeremy Corbyn or its corresponding talk page. If I click on "edit this page" then that is viewable, but not the page itself. All that appears there is its pending changes log. No other article seems to be affected by this. Can anyone explain this mystery? This is Paul (talk) 18:09, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't have a problem with the article page or talk page. There may be some problem with your browser. If the problem persists, you might want to ask for help at Village pump technical and tell what web browser, version of the browser, and operating system you are using. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:25, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Must confess I did wonder if it was a malware issue (having just watched something about malware on the news), but it looks like it was part of the update bug that's mentioned below. Working fine again now. Cheers, This is Paul (talk) 18:32, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Non-blanked page appearing blanked

    2014–15 Rangers F.C. season appears blank when I try to look at it, but looking through the history, I can't tell why. If I go to edit the page, I can see what's supposed to be there in an edit preview. I've tried refreshing and purging. Stranger still, this is only true for me on Chrome. I'm able to see the page normally on Firefox or Internet Explorer. Some sort of coding disagreeing with Chrome? Other pages are displaying normally. --BDD (talk) 18:09, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm glad not to be the only person experiencing this odd phenomenon. Have you tried clicking 'edit'? I just did and you can get the editable text. This is Paul (talk) 18:14, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Fixed. There was an error in the weekly update that caused a whole bunch of problems. The update has been reverted and the server is back online but some pages may have been cached with problems. A purge fixed the issue. --Stabila711 (talk) 18:16, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I just saw this on a Talk page. Given that I was the last editor to edit that page (several weeks ago) I thought perhaps I'd inserted something erroneous at the time. Cutting and pasting my text back in fixed the issue; didn't occur to me to try a purge. DonIago (talk) 18:18, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Note to help desk volunteers and others regarding "blank" pages

    There was a problem with the weekly software update that caused the server to lock. Pages that were loaded during this time appeared blank. Pages cached during this time will continue to appear blank unless they are purged or updated. This is just to let everyone know that questions regarding this issue may be happening in the future.

    See: Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Why do all pages look blank? for details. --Stabila711 (talk) 18:20, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    adding a photo to my personal Wiki entry page

    I would like to know how to upload my photo to go with my bio entry; I am the only Marge Simon you have. Marge Simon

    Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marge Simon (talk • contribs) 18:26, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    The photograph you wish to up load may have not had you finger on the shutter when it was taken. In other-words someone else may own the copyright. All you need to do is contact that photographer and ask s/he to email an OTRS to us. All explained here. Commons:OTRS. We can do the rest for you.--Aspro (talk) 18:53, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Marge Simon: please note that is not "your personal wiki page" - that is: a Wikipedia encyclopedia article about Marge Simon. Even if you are the subject of that article, you have no ownership or control over what appears on that page. You DO have a lot of control over what goes on your user page User:Marge Simon , as long as it is within the general parameters outlined at what is allowed and what is not allowed. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:24, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    yesterday's notice/blurb

    hi can anybody repost for me yesterday's header blurb about access to various reference sources (jstor, etc) via Wikipedia library or some such? got distracted before I could start clicking. thanks. Gzuckier (talk) 19:29, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Adamn Levine and Adam DeVine articles are exactly the same

    So this article Adam Levine about Adam Levine the singer from Maroon 5, is correct. However this artivle Adam DeVine about Adam DeVine is exactly the same as the one about Adam Levine when it should be about the comedian Adam DeVine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.167.163.224 (talk) 19:31, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Changes don't show up

    I made some changes (added some photos) to Fort Morris about 50 minutes ago, but they don't show up. I've flushed my cache and tried a different browser, but they don't show up. What is the problem? Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 20:53, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Bubba73: I fixed your gallery markup in this edit. That what you were looking for? Dismas|(talk) 20:55, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, that is it. I didn't notice that one little typo. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 20:56, 14 October 2015 (UTC) [reply]
    Resolved

    Inflammatory or biased information on a WIKI page

    How can you get inflammatory or bias information permanently removed from a WIKI page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paige Marie Turner (talk • contribs) 21:54, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Read the dispute resolution policy, which says that the first place to discuss is on the article talk page, Talk: Little River Band. You haven't tried discussing on the article talk page. Also read the edit-warring policy, because some of your previous efforts to remove information have been edit-warring. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:06, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    What did I do wrong?

    Can someone please tell me what I did wrong here to mess up the table? Thanks, This is Paul (talk) 22:09, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Just an update, this is now fixed thanks to Fort esc. Apparently I made a spelling mistake which I didn't spot because two of the letters look similar. This is Paul (talk) 22:54, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Want to make it so that that never happens again? Anonymous Pro is a free font designed so that characters that could be mistaken for one another (O, 0, I, l, 1, etc.) have distinct shapes to make them easier to tell apart. [5][6][7][8][9] --Guy Macon (talk) 07:38, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Paul swapped s and a, writing rowapsn instead of rowspan. I don't know his current font but if somebody can make this mistake without seeing it in a brief diff where they are looking for an error then "never happens again" sounds strong. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:30, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Pelican Island (Texas) vandilism

    This page has false information on it, and has characteristic sophomoric humor (unfunny and unflattering) that needs to be removed.

    Thanks and Gig 'em.

    p.s. here is the url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelican_Island_(Texas) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.43.10.72 (talk) 23:32, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry about that. It was added two days ago, I've just removed it. In the future you can just edit the article and remove it yourself. If the vandalism had been added recently, it can be "reverted", instructions for doing so are at Help:Reverting. Or you can just use the "edit" tab at the top of the article, and delete the offending text. I hope you decide to edit Wikipedia yourself in the future, it's easy to do and we can always use the help around here. --Jayron32 23:43, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    October 15

    What to do with a fake article on a user page that may be notable...

    Dear editors: Usually if I come across a fake article on a user page, I would send it to WP:MfD. However, this one is probably notable. It's unsourced, though, and somewhat promotional, and being picked up by search engines. The user is a single-purpose account. My instinct is to move it to Draft: space. Is there a better option that I am missing?—Anne Delong (talk) 00:33, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    i would say move it to draft space. She is probably close to WP:MUSIC having won ARIA [10] and an AM [11] and looks like major reviews [12] [13] and called "highly acclaimed" [14] -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:28, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    TheRedPenOfDoom The reason I said to put it in MfD was because it has been over 6 months since it was last edited. If it was in draft space (like it should have been all along) it would have been marked for speedy deletion under G13 anyways. There isn't anyone to work on it as the author (presumably the subject) put it up then never edited it again. Without sources and without anything else it should be removed as a fake article, or at the very least a BLP without sources. --Stabila711 (talk) 02:52, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I have already put it in MfD. JIP | Talk 06:15, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Speedy deletion criteria db-g13 is only for pages that have been either created through the WP:AFC process or which have been submitted for review at AfC. - not for all pages in Draft space. This page doesn't fit those criteria, but interestingly the same user did create a similar draft in AfC at about the same time. That page has been deleted, so one could argue that this content (or some of it) has been submitted at AfC.... Anyway, thanks for the opinions; I will follow up at MfD—Anne Delong (talk) 13:22, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    language choice

    even if the English version of an article is usually the most detailed, it is not always the case. is there a way to know which language has the best (in terms of length, details, and verified info) version of an article, without having to check each language one by one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.138.218.183 (talk) 00:55, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    No, but in general the major languages have more contributors so have more and better articles. Of course, an article about an item of interest to a particular language group will likely have more coverage in that language itself. For example, I'd expect the French article on French literature to be better and more complete. StuRat (talk) 01:06, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    The criteria length and level of details are not that relevant on a wiki, where much detail can be found in linked articles. E.g., in the English Wikipedia, the London article does not have much on the city's architecture, because we have a special article for that, Architecture of London. But there is a way to find good articles: Look at the sidebar: They are marked with gold and silver stars left of the language name. — Sebastian 08:39, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Leeds General Infirmary

    Please fix up reference number 12 on this page ThanksSrbernadette (talk) 03:39, 15 October 2015 (— Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.65.140.177 (talk) 06:00, 15 October 2015 (UTC) Please do help me fix up this tricky edit thanks Srbernadette (talk) 09:03, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    This information is from US Sources, and they are not valid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.65.140.177 (talk) 06:00, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Now 12th ref is gone. Thanks Supdiop (T🔹C) 09:13, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    And that WP:COATRACK section should not be added back - so there is no problem - Arjayay (talk) 09:17, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Karen Dawisha

    Hello, I created a wiki page for Karen Dawisha and have acquired 3 photos to upload by emailing Dr. Dawisha directly. But I am confused about the question of licenses. Through correspondence with the author, I have received the following information:

    "...all three [photos] are in the public domain. The one with Putin is mine, taken with my camera. Head shot is public, taken at Miami U. I hold the copyright for my book [cover]. "

    The problem is that no one has a physical paper copy of a license for these photos, particularly given that they were taken with the author's own camera. Can I post them? How do I answer the questions about whether I have a copy of the licenses, when there are no physical licenses in existence?

    Hannacarol (talk) 11:24, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    The fact that they were taken with Dawisha's camera is completely irrelevant. The copyright lies with the person who took the picture, not the person who owns the camera. Likewise for whoever took the head shot at Miami U. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:29, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, you are saying that the book cover is both in the public domain and that Dawisha has the copyright for the book cover. When something is in the public domain, all rights are released. So it can't be copyrighted. I'm also skeptical about either of those claims since the book's publisher often owns the copyright on the images on its books. Dismas|(talk) 13:16, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    "reference not defined" error when it is defined

    This is strange - I'm seeing a lot of odd ref errors lately and now this. Please see Florent Groberg reflist. I'm getting the error: "Cite error: The named reference washpost was invoked but never defined." "washpost" is clearly defined in the preceding section. Can anyone help? Thank you! —МандичкаYO 😜 11:40, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Your problem was that the preceding section was being ignored because of an unterminated ref tag in the section before that. I've cured it with this simple edit. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:02, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Appreciate it! Thank you! I didn't even think of that. —МандичкаYO 😜 13:08, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Coretta Scott King

    Please correct the reference error on Coretta Scott King. "Cite error: Invalid ref tag; name "Bagley" defined multiple times with different content"--76.14.45.22 (talk) 14:03, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&oldid=685867191"